M.V.

P LAW COLLEGE
MOOT COURT CASE

ACADEMIC YEAR 2019–2020

STUDENT ADVOCATE
Hapse Pallavi J

LLB-III FOR:
APPELANTS

Presented Before Prof.Sandhya

Gadakh
 IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELATE
JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.237 OF2020

(Arising Out of S.L.P.(Crl)No.4592Of2017)

PREM CHANDSINGH ….APPELANTS

Versus

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

AND ANOTHER ….RESPONDENT

IN THE MATTER OF
PETITTION FOR APPEAL AGAINST JUDGEMENTS AND ORDER PASSED BY4 th
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,GONDA (U.P.)
INDEX

1 Cover Page 1

2 List of Abbreviations 3

3 Status &Books Reffered 4

4 Provisions & Sections 5

5 Vakalatnama 6

6 Statement of Jurisdiction 7

7 Statement of Fact 8

8 Issues 9

9 Statement of Arguments 10

10 Prayer 13

11 Affidavit 14

12 Verification 15
LISTOFABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS FULLFORMS

HC High Court

SC Supreme Court

Govt. Government

AIR All India Reporter

Hon'ble Honourable

SLP Special Leave Petition

STATUS AND BOOK S

REFFE

0 RRED

1. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

2. Indian Penal Code, 1860

3. Constitution of India

4. Supreme Court Reference

WEB SITES REFFERRED

1. www.google.com

2. www.Indiakanoon.com

3. www.lawyerclubindia.com

4. www.bar&bench.com

5. www.legallaid.com

6. www.livelaw.com

7. www.lawctopus.com

CASES REFFERED
1. Inder Mohan Goswami & Another VS State Of Uttaranchal &Ors
2. Sheila Sebastion v/s R.Javaharaj
3. M/S Pan Resorts Limited vs H.H.Marthanda Varma
4. Lalita Kumari vs Govt of Uttar Pradesh
PROVISIONS AND SECTIONS

 Section156 (3)of Criminal Procedure Code,1973

Magistrate to direct the end police to conduct investigation was only in respect of
acognizable offense.It is in cumbents for the police to register an FIR if the complaint
relates to the commission of acognizable offense.
 Section 300 of Criminal Procedure Code,1973
Person once convicted or acquitted not to be tried for same offense. while the acquittal
remain inforce, be charge with the f tasa servant, or upon the same facts with theft
simply,or with criminal breach of trust.
 Section 419 of Criminal Procedure Code,1973
Punishment for cheating by personation–whoever cheats by personation shall be
punished.
 Section420ofCriminal ProcedureCode,1973
Warrant with whom to be lodged–When the prisoe to be confined na jai l,the warrant shall
belodged with theJailor.
 Section 419 of Indian Penal Code 1860 Punishment for cheating by personation
Section420ofIndianPenalCode1860
Cheating and dishonesty including delivery of property
 Section467Indian Penal Code1860 Forgery of valuable will
 Section468 of Indian Pena lCode1860
Forgery for purpose of cheating–punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
 Section 471 of Indian Penal Code1860
Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document or electronic record which he
knows or has reason to believe to be aforged document or electronic record, shall be punished in
the same manner as if he had forged such document or electronic record.
Opposed to public policy.
 VAKALATNAMA
IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL
APPEAL NO. 237 OF 2020

(Arising Out of S.L.P.(Crl)No.4592Of2017)

PREMCHAND SINGH ….APPELANTS

Versus
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
AND ANOTHER ….RESPONDENT

Me the Appellant do here by appoint a student Adv. Chhaya Bhaskar Nisal on record of hon’ble
supreme court of India to appear for me in the above writ petition to conduct the proceeding
on my behalf that may be taken in respect of any application connected there with in any
decre or judgment or any order passed there in including the proceeding for review to be filled
or to obtain return receive document and to try deposit and receive money on my behalf in the
said petition we ready to rectify all the acts done by the aforesaid student advocate in the
presence of this authority and sign shere under.
ACCEPTED ON: / /2020
PLACE – NEW DELHI
Sd/-

APPELLANTS (PREM CHANDSINGH)

Sd/-

Pallavi Hapse
(STUDENTADVOCATE)
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

Appellate Jurisdiction of Supreme Court in appeal from high court is regard to

criminal matter.

1) An appeal shall lie to the supreme court from any judgment decree of Final order
in a criminal proceeding of a High court in the territory of India if the High court has
on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to
death ;or has with drawn for trial be fore it self any case from any court subordinate
to its authority and has in such trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him
to death ; or certifies under Article134A that the case is a fit one for appeal ot he
supreme court .

2) Provided that an appeal under sub-clause shall lie subject to such provision as may
be made in that be half under clause(1) of Article145 to such conditions as the High
Court may establish or require.

3) Parliament may by law confer on the supreme court any further power to entertain
and he are appeals from any Judgment, final order or sentences in a criminal
proceeding of a High court in the territory of India subject to such condition and
limitations as may be specified in such law.
STATEMENT OFF ACT
1) In this case the respondent has given general power of attorney to the Appellant on
02.05.1985.On the basis to sold certain lands belonging the Respondent.
2) One of the respondent Lodged FIRNo.160 of 1989on 14.09.1989that never executed any
general power of attorney in favoure of the Appellant. Appellant for general power of
attorney to sell his land illegally.
3) The Trial court acquitted the appellant as the charge could not be established. On the
basis that no record s are not available.
4) The respondent then filed civil suit No.353 of 2007 to cancel the general power of
attorney. The Respondent filed an application u/s156(3)criminal procedure code.
5) This application was forwarded by the court to police leading to registration
.Alleging that the appellant that forged general power of attorney and sold lands of
respondent, still earlier also sold.
6) As per the responses of civil suit No.353 of 2007. The appellant filed an application
for discharge. For referring to his acquittal, stating that he could not be tried for same
offence twice.
7) Revision against the same was dismissed on behalf of appellant can more
appropriately be urged at the time of framing the charge.
8) Submitted that the order of acquittal and the cancellation of general power of is not in
dispute.
9) First and second FIR are refers for the general power of attorney comp aratively
executed offer long year. Therefore, it is a complete abuse of the process of law and the
proceeding are fit to be quashed.
10) Appealing the High court has declined interference .On the basis that
ingredients of the two FIR were different.
11) The High court discharge application was rightly rejected and
interference declined in revision.
12) Supreme court Justify that, the Judgment may not have been made
available is therefore inconsequential and respondent demanding the cancellation of
the general power of attorney after acquittal of the appellant.
13) The appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 01.03.2017 are set
aside.
ISSUES

1) Whether the power of attorney executed by the respondent or not?

2) Whether the person once convicted or acquitted not be tried for same offence?

3) Whether the power of attorney is legal or forged?

4) Whether the civil court have power to entertain the application filed for lodging FIR?
 STATEMENTOFARGUMENTS
I request sincerely that following should be kindly taken care of my contention
that can be argued in the present case is that appellant denied all the adverse allegation levied
by the respondent against him.
ISSUENO1
1)Whether the power of attorney executed by the respondent or not?
On behalf of the appellant side I am student advocate Adv Pallavi hapse respectfully submits:-
Your honor the general power of attorney is executed by the respondent. It is
mentioned that the general power of attorney dated 02.05.1985 executed by respondent no.
2.The respondent has executed the power of attorney in front of two witnesses which are Sushil
Kumar and Arvind . These are the two witnesses are mentioned in the pursuance.
This power of attorney is signed by the respondent and sign not denied by the
respondent. Hence it is presume that the power of attorney is executed by the respondent.
CASELAW
INDER MOHAN GOSWAMI &ANOTHER VS STATE OF UTTARAN CHAL& ORS
Supreme court of India on 9th October 2007
President Mohan lal Sharma executed a general power of attorney on 13.12.1996 in favour of
respondent. Big has was transferred by executing a general power of attorney dated
13.12.1996 in favor of respondent.
In this case general power of attorney executed by Late Mohanlal Sharma president of
the sabha had ceased to be in effect after his death. So the power of attorney is given to the
respondent in the name of his son Sureh Ahuja. The respondent earnest money had been
forfeited. All of this was only done after appellants had given respondent due notice.
ISSUENO2
2.Whether the person once convicted or acquitted not betried for same offence?
On behalf of the appellant side I am student advocate ChhayaB.Nisal respectfully submits:-
When person once convicted or acquitted not betried for same offence. As per the section 300 of
the cr.p.c. provided that, person who has once been tried by a court of competent Jurisdiction
for an offence and convicted or acquitted of such offence shall while such conviction or
acquittal remains in force, not beliable to be tried again for the same offence, nor on the same
fact for any other offence for which a different charge from the one made against him might have
been made under sub –section(1)of section221or for which he might have been convicted
under sub-section (2) thereof.
CASELAW
SHEILASEBASTIONV/SR.JAWAHARAJ
Supreme Court of India on11thMay2018
In this case the complainant alleges that accused was convicted under section 465 IPC and
was the offence of forgery making of a false document is essential. On the alleged forged
power of attorney do not match with that document.
Supreme Court was held that we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the
HighCourt. Appeals stand dismissed being devoid of merits .As mentioned in this case the
person once convicted cannot be tried for same offence.
ISSUENO3
2.Whether the power of attorney is legal or forged?
On behalf of the appellant side I am student advocate Adv Pallavi Hapse respectfully
submits:-
Your honor the general power of attorney whether legal or forged it is disputed. The appellant
is filed in the application in front of JMFC but JMFC rejected the application. JMFC also have
no right to determine the legality of the general power of attorney. The suit is file in the civil
court by the respondent but civil court has not given judgment still. Though civil court have
the right to decide the legality. But still the suit Is pending in front of civil court.
CASELAW
M/S Pan Resorts Limited vs H.H. MarthandaVarma Madras High
Court on 30thOctober 2014

In this case petitioner using the said fraudulent and forged power of attorney and colluding with
the respondent. There is no confirmation about the General Power of attorney. Whether it is
legal or forged. Suit is filed in the civil court by the respondent but civil court has not given
judgment.
At the time of pronouncing the judgment the it was informed by the learned counsel appearing
for the first respondent passed away an dif that being so any observation finding given against
him in this order will hold good for other contemnors.
ISSUENO4

1) Whether the civil court have power to entertain the application filed for lodging FIR ?

On behalf of the appellant side I am student advocate Pallavi Hapse respectfully submits:-
Your honor as per the civil court have no power to entertain the application filed for
lodging FIR.A FIR is the very first step in the criminal matter in which the facts of the
commission of crimes is reported to the police by the person who is a witness to the case,victim
or a person who has knowledge of the same act done by the accused. Under normal
circumstances FIR cannot be registered about any civil dispute because section 154 of criminal
procedure code. Under which the FIR is registered clearly say that police are bound to register a
complaint about a cognizable offence.
CASELAW
Lalita Kumari vs Govt of Uttar Pradesh 2014 2 SCC 1

In this case it is mentioned that in a civil matter a contempt petition can be filed before the
High court against the officer whoref used to lodge an FIR Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Court was held that the police must registered FIR where the complaint is closes a cognizable
offence.
 PRAYER

In the premises,the appellant humbly prays that light of the issues raised
,arguments advanced and authorities cited, the Hon ’ble Supreme Court that it may graciously
pleased to hold,adjudge and advance–
To entitle the appellants to quash the FIR as per the suitable
adjugesment.
1) To entitle the appellants as per the matter should be acquitted to the appellant from the
respondent.
2) Any other order, declaration of relief that may be deemed fit in the best interest of justice,
fairness, equity, and good conscience;
As for the acts ,the appellants shall forever be obliged.

Accepted On- / /2020

Place –New Delhi

Sd/-

APPELLANTS (PREM CHANDSINGH)

Sd/-

Pallavi Hapse (STUDENT

ADVOCATE)
 AFFIDAVIT
IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPEL AT E
JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.237OF2020

(Arising Out of S.L.P.(Crl)No.4592Of2017)

PREMCHAND SINGH ….APPELANTS

Versus
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
AND ANOTHER ….RESPONDENT

We , Prem Chand Singh and Others , the appellants of solemn affirmation state to the best of
our knowledge ,be lie fand information in witness therefore that the contents of this appeal are
true to the best of my knowledge and hence we sign here under
Accepted O n-/ /2020 Place –New
Delhi

Sd/-

APPELLANTS (PREM CHANDSINGH)

Sd/-

Pallavi Hapse
(STUDENTADVOCATE)
 VERIFICATION

I , Counsel on behalf of Prem Chand Singh( Appellants ) , do hereby state on solemn

affirmation that above contents are true and correct to the bes to fmy knowledge and belief and
hence ls ign here under

Accepted On – / /2020
Place – New Delhi

Sd/-

APPELLANTS (PREM CHANDSINGH)

Sd/-

Pallavi hapse (STUDENT

ADVOCATE)